Continued discussion on reverse predictability (see previous blog ‘entropy and the singularity’).
Shared entropy that exists between the possible microscopic configurations of combined macroscopic environments, is only shared up until the point that the actual configuration is realised. Once this occurs, when viewed retrospectively – this outcome is the only possible outcome. This is because time makes the process irreversible and unchangeable. It HAS happened.
But what if we can use this logic to infer greater insight into probability – can this work in ‘reverse predictability’s’ favour? The random outcome which does occur, creates irreversible change in the microscopic and macroscopic environments, changing the shared entropy in a unique way. If we know all the possible microscopic configurations of the shared entropy, then we can also know how each configuration, if achieved, would change the micro and macroscopic environments. There is a vast number of possible configurations…it’s a three dimensional matrix made up of all the shared entropy configurations. This vastness of possibilities cannot be predicted (they are equally likely), and then when the magnitude of the universe is considered, the matrix of possibilities is infinite.
But infinity will always convey an infinite number of possibilities. Why don’t we use the physical corrosion of time to visualise the behaviour of infinite probability?
Look at how time changes the direction of infinite probability. Each irreversible outcome, eliminates that precise event from ever occurring again. From this perspective, we can look at all things that have happened and know this:
1. They were possible in the past;
2. They are no longer possible in the future – although there are still infinite possibilities in the future, these are not included in that vastness;
3. All the possible outcomes that were equally likely to occur, but didn’t, do two things – they either also become impossible in the new infinity of possible outcomes, or they remain possible in the new infinity.
4. So the outcomes that did occur, and the outcomes that are no longer possible because of the outcomes that did occur, exist in a non-existent world, in parallel to the infinite future.
5. This is helpful for reverse predictability because the eliminated non-existent outcomes are finite – we can travel back, layer by layer, reducing possible outcomes based on the destruction of time.
I don’t believe this demonstrates the possibility of infinite parallel universes. The opposite in fact, I think this demonstrates that the universe behaves exponentially, but the exponential behaviour is not linear – it is three dimensional, swaying through infinity. However the definition of exponential is expansion – expansion from what? Exponential growth of zero is zero, as is 1. You need 2 for exponentialism to exist.
If we can’t fathom how something can come from nothing, then why don’t we deduce what the only possible outcome was, from two possible outcomes? The macroscopic environment that created the outcome that did occur, is the same environment that contained the equally possible configuration of the outcome that didn’t occur. This is the singular state that sparked the exponential growth of the infinite universe. God knows what this is 🤔 any ideas??